9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 30.03.2017 passed by the Pr. CIT under Section 263 of the Incometax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called `the Act') in relation to the assessment year 2012-13. 2.1. Briefly stated the factual matrix of the case is that the assessee did not furnish return of income within the time allowed under Section 139(1) of the Act. Notice was i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure and not the amount of reserves. Thus, as against the gross income of Rs. 20.64 crore declared in the return before exemption, the Assessing Officer allowed further deduction of Rs. 402.73 crore, being the excess of actual expenditure over the amount of reserves created. However, total income was determined at Nil by observing that the loss could not be carried forward for set off against the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned order. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the revisionary order. 3. We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant record. Section 263 of the Act empowers the CIT to revise an assessment order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Twin conditions set out in the section, viz, the assessment order, being, erroneous and prejudicial to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orward the loss, has attained finality as the same has been accepted and not challenged in any further proceedings. 5. We have noted above that in the original assessment, the AO determined total income at Nil and did not allow carry forward of loss computed at Rs. 382.09 crore. It is a matter of record that pursuant to the revisionary order, the Assessing Officer again took up the assessment und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f loss, without allowing any carry forward to subsequent year(s) for set off, is in no way prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Since the original assessment order in the instant case satisfies, at the most, the first condition under Section 263 of the Act, being erroneous from the stand point of the ld. CIT, it fails to satisfy the second condition of being, prejudicial to the interest of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
